by Bored_Dragon | Public
Not as good as Pan's Labyrinth, but definitely worth watching.
I didn't read books, somehow I always have something smarter to read, but I gladly rewatch the movies from time to time. Maybe it's a story for children and it may not have special depth, but it is visually beautiful and so much fun, even after several viewing.
8,5/10
PG-13 | 178 min | Action, Adventure, Drama
The Lord of the Rings (2001-2003)
"One Ring to rule them all,
One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all
And in the darkness bind them"
Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" is a book that has introduced me to the world of epic fantasy and, while no longer in the top of my favorites, will forever hold a special place in my heart. I will never forget how I eagerly awaited this movie trilogy, as well as the thrill of the movies when I first saw them in the cinema. And with each new viewing, enjoyment is no less. Although I don't like movies this long, the twelve hours of "The Lord of the Rings" just fly by.
It is far from being the perfect movie, as many seem to perceive it. I find many changes to the book to be unnecessary hollywoodization. Elijah Wood never felt right in the role of Frodo, and his latently gay relationship with Sam will never stop poking my eyes. It may be up to me, but I've never experienced it in a book. There are a lot more of all sorts of minor complaints, but in spite of them, the overall impression of this epic trilogy in every respect is an unforgettable experience. A very well adapted story, camera, directing and effects that take your breath away, mostly excellent cast choices and ingeniously blended music that greatly enhances the already perfect atmosphere, make this film a masterpiece of the genre and, in my opinion, one of the best film achievements of all time.
10/10
It is much weaker than the first movie, so it was difficult to keep the attention for nearly three hours, but it's far from being bad.
7/10
The Lord of the Rings (2001-2003)
"One Ring to rule them all,
One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all
And in the darkness bind them"
Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" is a book that has introduced me to the world of epic fantasy and, while no longer in the top of my favorites, will forever hold a special place in my heart. I will never forget how I eagerly awaited this movie trilogy, as well as the thrill of the movies when I first saw them in the cinema. And with each new viewing, enjoyment is no less. Although I don't like movies this long, the twelve hours of "The Lord of the Rings" just fly by.
It is far from being the perfect movie, as many seem to perceive it. I find many changes to the book to be unnecessary hollywoodization. Elijah Wood never felt right in the role of Frodo, and his latently gay relationship with Sam will never stop poking my eyes. It may be up to me, but I've never experienced it in a book. There are a lot more of all sorts of minor complaints, but in spite of them, the overall impression of this epic trilogy in every respect is an unforgettable experience. A very well adapted story, camera, directing and effects that take your breath away, mostly excellent cast choices and ingeniously blended music that greatly enhances the already perfect atmosphere, make this film a masterpiece of the genre and, in my opinion, one of the best film achievements of all time.
10/10
PG-13 | 143 min | Action, Adventure, Fantasy
I'll never get tired of this movie.
8,5/10
Underworld Franchise (2003-2016)
Still a better love story than Twilight :D
Set (predominantly) in the present day, this fantasy franchise tells us of a centuries-old war between vampires and werewolves. We follow the story from the perspective of Selene (Kate Beckinsale), one of the greatest vampire warriors, who leads the werewolf hunt. When she meets Michael (Scott Speedman), a man who is persecuted by werewolves for a mysterious reason, her life and worldviews change drastically. This saga has quite a well-crafted story and characterization, though as the franchise goes on, the quality of the story declines to eventually turn into a shallow action. The acting, the camera, the directing, the effects, the music ... it's all pretty well done, but nothing spectacular.
Underworld (2003)
The first film introduces us to the dark world of vampires and werewolves, which secretly coexists with ours. While vampires are a well-organized society with a powerful army, werewolves are a wild unleashed horde that is gradually exterminated by vampires. And then emerges a leader capable of uniting werewolves, as well as a man capable of uniting the features of both races in one hybrid being. A good thriller with a story that will intrigue you, and with just the right amount of romance and well-directed action.
7/10
Underworld: Evolution (2006)
"Evolution" continues directly to the first movie and now Selene and Michael are trying to break into the history and secrets of both races, in a desperate attempt to bring the centuries-old war to an end. A worthy sequel in the same manner and quality as the first film.
7/10
Underworld: Rise of the Lycans (2009)
"Rise of the Lycans" is an "origins story" and takes us into the Middle Ages. Vampires were aristocracy, and werewolves were their slaves, until the young werewolf Lucian rose into a leader who led his race in the struggle for liberation, thus beginning a centuries-old war between the two races. The franchise still holds a level.
7/10
Underworld: Awakening (2012)
Humans discover the existence of vampires and werewolves and decide to exterminate them. Michael and Selene are hit while fighting humans and she wakes up twelve years later, not knowing what happened to Michael. She now has a twelve-year-old daughter, the first natural-born hybrid, who she must protect from Lycans that want to take advantage of her in their fight for dominance.
The fourth film is slightly weaker than its predecessors. The action continues in the same manner, but the story is underdeveloped. I was under the impression that I was watching a long movie trailer, not the movie itself. But basically, I liked it.
6,5/10
Underworld: Blood Wars (2016)
The latest installment in the "Underworld" franchise is by far the worst, but not redundant. "Blood Wars" rounds off this saga, but it does a rather lousy job, and the movie is reduced to eighty minutes of shallow action and two-dimensional characters that are there just to keep the story from staying unfinished. I don't want to recommend it, but again, you have to see it if you wish to know how the story ends.
5/10
The Lord of the Rings (2001-2003)
"One Ring to rule them all,
One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all
And in the darkness bind them"
Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" is a book that has introduced me to the world of epic fantasy and, while no longer in the top of my favorites, will forever hold a special place in my heart. I will never forget how I eagerly awaited this movie trilogy, as well as the thrill of the movies when I first saw them in the cinema. And with each new viewing, enjoyment is no less. Although I don't like movies this long, the twelve hours of "The Lord of the Rings" just fly by.
It is far from being the perfect movie, as many seem to perceive it. I find many changes to the book to be unnecessary hollywoodization. Elijah Wood never felt right in the role of Frodo, and his latently gay relationship with Sam will never stop poking my eyes. It may be up to me, but I've never experienced it in a book. There are a lot more of all sorts of minor complaints, but in spite of them, the overall impression of this epic trilogy in every respect is an unforgettable experience. A very well adapted story, camera, directing and effects that take your breath away, mostly excellent cast choices and ingeniously blended music that greatly enhances the already perfect atmosphere, make this film a masterpiece of the genre and, in my opinion, one of the best film achievements of all time.
10/10
Good movie. Perhaps a bit too long, I had the impression of watching a series, but good. It's not Guillermo del Toro that I'm used to, but it's certainly worth a look, especially who likes super(anti)hero movies.
7/10
Something's wrong
Although I did not read the book, it is obvious that something's wrong with this movie. In many aspects it is better that two prequels, but then again it leaves impression of weak movie, occasionally even boring. Acting, directing, production, special effects (especially hippogryf), everything is on high level and finale is great, but with story itself something definitely isn't right. Something's missing. Book fans surely know what I am talking about, even if I have no idea myself...
7/10
Secret Jesus
Criminal, son of a preacher, after many years, returns to his hometown in Texas to take over his father's church. But although he is trying to be good, past, long-standing habits and character can not be erased overnight. Things are further complicated when the story involves a child of the forbidden love, the Irish vampire, a pair of angels, a completely crazy local tycoon, and an ex-girlfriend.
"If by 'baby' you mean the most powerful entity ever known, the singular force that could shift the balance of power, threaten all of creation, then yeah, it's a 'baby'."
A great story, a dark atmosphere pervaded with (black) humor and a bunch of completely insane characters and situations. The chaotic angel fight, which opens the sixth episode of the first season, is one of the craziest things that I was fortunate to see on television. The atmosphere and framing will especially appeal to comics fans. If for no other reason, watch this because of Joseph Gilgun as a vampire of a very specific kind, which you did not have the opportunity to see before. Brilliant.
"Afraid of the cross?
It's a 2.000-year-old symbol of hypocrisy, slavery, and oppression. But it won't burn me face off."
The following seasons introduce a bunch of new characters of which, although some are perfect, many fail to maintain level with characters from the first season, in terms of both the idea and the cast and their performances. The story further complicates, maybe too much, and the third and fourth seasons are totally over-the-top. I love over-the-top comedies and so-bad-it-is-good movies, but this series didn't start in that manner.
The second season has completely cut off any ties to the first one, and the series becomes something else entirely, and the third season went so far that one wrong step could make everything go to hell. They brought it in the situation to balance on a thin line between ingenious and ridiculous and I was afraid that the fourth season could easily bury the show. But they managed to maintain the level to the end and this is easily one of the best things in the genre so far.
9/10
Little girl, don't touch that squirrel's nuts! It'll make him crazy!
Terribly underrated movie. Of course, it is not on top of world cinematography, but in own genre, it's a true masterpiece. In my opinion, one of Barton's finest achievements. Fairy-tale for children and all of us who still feel that way.
8/10
What a story it is. A tragic tale of romance, passion, and murder most foul.
While he was practicing vows in a forest night before the wedding, clumsy Victor accidentally proposes to a corpse of a girl brutally murdered by her fiancé. Corpse wakes up, pronounces that fateful "I do" and takes Victor to the underworld. He is trying to escape and get back to the girl he loves. One of Barton's best movies. Plot, emotion, acting, music... beautiful.
9/10
Either this movie is better than the previous ones or it's just my impression because I had a fan(atic), who knows all the books by heart, to fill in the flaws that a film makes in relation to the book.
8/10
Underworld Franchise (2003-2016)
Still a better love story than Twilight :D
Set (predominantly) in the present day, this fantasy franchise tells us of a centuries-old war between vampires and werewolves. We follow the story from the perspective of Selene (Kate Beckinsale), one of the greatest vampire warriors, who leads the werewolf hunt. When she meets Michael (Scott Speedman), a man who is persecuted by werewolves for a mysterious reason, her life and worldviews change drastically. This saga has quite a well-crafted story and characterization, though as the franchise goes on, the quality of the story declines to eventually turn into a shallow action. The acting, the camera, the directing, the effects, the music ... it's all pretty well done, but nothing spectacular.
Underworld (2003)
The first film introduces us to the dark world of vampires and werewolves, which secretly coexists with ours. While vampires are a well-organized society with a powerful army, werewolves are a wild unleashed horde that is gradually exterminated by vampires. And then emerges a leader capable of uniting werewolves, as well as a man capable of uniting the features of both races in one hybrid being. A good thriller with a story that will intrigue you, and with just the right amount of romance and well-directed action.
7/10
Underworld: Evolution (2006)
"Evolution" continues directly to the first movie and now Selene and Michael are trying to break into the history and secrets of both races, in a desperate attempt to bring the centuries-old war to an end. A worthy sequel in the same manner and quality as the first film.
7/10
Underworld: Rise of the Lycans (2009)
"Rise of the Lycans" is an "origins story" and takes us into the Middle Ages. Vampires were aristocracy, and werewolves were their slaves, until the young werewolf Lucian rose into a leader who led his race in the struggle for liberation, thus beginning a centuries-old war between the two races. The franchise still holds a level.
7/10
Underworld: Awakening (2012)
Humans discover the existence of vampires and werewolves and decide to exterminate them. Michael and Selene are hit while fighting humans and she wakes up twelve years later, not knowing what happened to Michael. She now has a twelve-year-old daughter, the first natural-born hybrid, who she must protect from Lycans that want to take advantage of her in their fight for dominance.
The fourth film is slightly weaker than its predecessors. The action continues in the same manner, but the story is underdeveloped. I was under the impression that I was watching a long movie trailer, not the movie itself. But basically, I liked it.
6,5/10
Underworld: Blood Wars (2016)
The latest installment in the "Underworld" franchise is by far the worst, but not redundant. "Blood Wars" rounds off this saga, but it does a rather lousy job, and the movie is reduced to eighty minutes of shallow action and two-dimensional characters that are there just to keep the story from staying unfinished. I don't want to recommend it, but again, you have to see it if you wish to know how the story ends.
5/10
Good plot, great acting and directing, and fantastic visual effects. It lacks some of the "soul" first one had, but it's still a sequel and it's bound to repeat itself and lose some soul on lack of originality. But whatever it loses on originality, it is more than covered by quality in every aspect.
When I was watching the first one, unfortunately, I did not pay attention to music. This time music hypnotized me. It is so good that I even watched complete ending credits not being able to interrupt music that follows it. The movie sounds fantastic.
And of course, Johnny Depp, the only man who could possibly pull off Jack Sparrow, one of the best actors of our time.
8/10
Magical
This movie leaves me speechless every time…
8/10
I have not read the book, but I have the impression that the film is a bit hurried. Maybe it would be better if, instead of two hours, they stretched it to three, so that the story could be better elaborated.
7/10
Beautiful fairy-tale
"Are we human because we gaze at the stars
or do we gaze at them because we are human?
Pointless, really. Do the stars gaze back?
Now, that's a question..."
If Neil Gaiman is not enough reason for you to see this movie, there are also Claire Danes, Robert De Niro, Michelle Pfeiffer, Peter O'Toole, Ian McKellen, Siena Miller...
9/10
"Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom?"
15 November 2015
Death: HUMANS NEED FANTASY TO BE HUMAN, TO BE THE PLACE WHERE FALLING ANGEL MEETS THE RISING APE.
Susan: Tooth fairies? Hogfathers? Little...
Death: YES. AS PRACTICE. YOU HAVE TO START OUT LEARNING TO BELIEVE THE LITTLE LIES.
Susan: So we can believe the big ones?
Death: YES. JUSTICE. MERCY. DUTY. THAT SORT OF THING.
Susan: They're not the same at all!
Death: YOU THINK SO? THEN TAKE THE UNIVERSE AND GRIND IT DOWN TO THE FINEST POWDER AND SIEVE IT THROUGH THE FINEST SIEVE AND THEN SHOW ME ONE ATOM OF JUSTICE, ONE MOLECULE OF MERCY. AND YET - Death waved a hand - AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME ... SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED.
Susan: Yes, but people have got to believe that, or what's the point...
Death: MY POINT EXACTLY.
7/10 [10/10 for the book]
A little weaker but more versatile than the first one. Certainly entertaining.
7/10
Amazing life in reverse
For me, this is one of the best movies of all time. The story is well developed, there are no significant flaws or illogicality, the idea is original and interesting, acting and directing very good. It lasts more than two and a half hours, but with a curious story, strong dialogues, depth, and well-measured tempo it keeps attention on a high level from the beginning till the end. I would not be myself if I didn't have some objections, of course, but this time I don't want to spoil.
10/10
Underworld Franchise (2003-2016)
Still a better love story than Twilight :D
Set (predominantly) in the present day, this fantasy franchise tells us of a centuries-old war between vampires and werewolves. We follow the story from the perspective of Selene (Kate Beckinsale), one of the greatest vampire warriors, who leads the werewolf hunt. When she meets Michael (Scott Speedman), a man who is persecuted by werewolves for a mysterious reason, her life and worldviews change drastically. This saga has quite a well-crafted story and characterization, though as the franchise goes on, the quality of the story declines to eventually turn into a shallow action. The acting, the camera, the directing, the effects, the music ... it's all pretty well done, but nothing spectacular.
Underworld (2003)
The first film introduces us to the dark world of vampires and werewolves, which secretly coexists with ours. While vampires are a well-organized society with a powerful army, werewolves are a wild unleashed horde that is gradually exterminated by vampires. And then emerges a leader capable of uniting werewolves, as well as a man capable of uniting the features of both races in one hybrid being. A good thriller with a story that will intrigue you, and with just the right amount of romance and well-directed action.
7/10
Underworld: Evolution (2006)
"Evolution" continues directly to the first movie and now Selene and Michael are trying to break into the history and secrets of both races, in a desperate attempt to bring the centuries-old war to an end. A worthy sequel in the same manner and quality as the first film.
7/10
Underworld: Rise of the Lycans (2009)
"Rise of the Lycans" is an "origins story" and takes us into the Middle Ages. Vampires were aristocracy, and werewolves were their slaves, until the young werewolf Lucian rose into a leader who led his race in the struggle for liberation, thus beginning a centuries-old war between the two races. The franchise still holds a level.
7/10
Underworld: Awakening (2012)
Humans discover the existence of vampires and werewolves and decide to exterminate them. Michael and Selene are hit while fighting humans and she wakes up twelve years later, not knowing what happened to Michael. She now has a twelve-year-old daughter, the first natural-born hybrid, who she must protect from Lycans that want to take advantage of her in their fight for dominance.
The fourth film is slightly weaker than its predecessors. The action continues in the same manner, but the story is underdeveloped. I was under the impression that I was watching a long movie trailer, not the movie itself. But basically, I liked it.
6,5/10
Underworld: Blood Wars (2016)
The latest installment in the "Underworld" franchise is by far the worst, but not redundant. "Blood Wars" rounds off this saga, but it does a rather lousy job, and the movie is reduced to eighty minutes of shallow action and two-dimensional characters that are there just to keep the story from staying unfinished. I don't want to recommend it, but again, you have to see it if you wish to know how the story ends.
5/10
"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience"
30 June 2016 / 28 March 2020
Like in "Hogfather", Death is pretty much lousy done, which is a shame because Death is the most awesome character in Discworld series. But besides that, it is absolutely fantastic. I thought it would be impossible to adapt Pratchett to feature film and preserve its original charm, but the movie definitely possesses the spirit of the written Discworld. The Luggage and legendary Del Boy in the role of Rincewind are an inexhaustible source of entertainment.
9/10
Enjoyable
Hard-core fans of Harry Potter claim that movie franchise started well enough but it goes worse with every new movie. To me, as to someone who did not read the books, it is quite the opposite. Maybe they don't follow books as much as they should, but actors are growing up and acting improves with every movie, story is more and more interesting and directing and effects sustain same good level. Great entertainment for whole family.
7,5/10
Visually it's nothing special, but it's far from bad. But story is lousy... Boring, confusing, without emotion... waste of time.
4/10 [6/10 for animation and 2/10 for story]
Loved it
Pretty much low-budget, but very entertaining. A smart, witty parody on famous fairy-tales, full of cultured humor, without vulgarity and all those nasty things that suppose to be funny these days. Perfect for brain relaxation.
8/10
Books must be treated with respect, we feel that in our bones, because words have power. Bring enough words together they can bend space and time.
Terry Pratchett is one of my favorite writers. I have every single book published in my country, 41 to be precise, and that's not even half of his bibliography. He is best known for his Discworld series, dozens of novels placed on a flat world, carried through space on the shoulders of four elephants, standing on the back of Atuin, gigantic turtle. Sounds familiar? In these novels, Terry parodies the whole history of humanity in all its aspects. I can not choose the favorite one, because every single one is awesome. Some of his work is adapted to movies, TV series and cartoons and I think I saw them all. On par with "The Colour of Magic", this is by far the best adaptation. I won't go into the story itself because I will assume everyone has read the book. And if you still didn't, do yourself a favor and put it on your priority list. Like Terry's books, this movie is extremely entertaining, hilarious and joyful. It may not be a masterpiece of cinematography, but it surely is the masterpiece of clever and meaningful comedy.
9/10
PG-13 | 146 min | Adventure, Family, Fantasy
7,5/10
LOTR of the TV world
4 October 2016
TV shows I rated 10 are rare, I could count them on one hand. And this is one of them. The excellent crew did this based on the fantastic book and in cooperation with the original writer. I do not want to compare this show with anything else because it is beyond any comparison, but speaking only about its quality, this is for the TV world what "Lord of the Rings" is for movies. I doubt anyone will top this any time soon.
New books are not out yet, and producers decided not to wait for them, so series are ahead of the books now. I did not watch the latest season yet, and I see many bad impressions and comments on the web, but even if they really did a lousy job on this last season, the previous five seasons are so good that last one cannot spoil average grade below ten out of ten. Unfortunately, I did not see the famous "Breaking Bad" yet, so I cannot be 100% sure, but for me, this is the very best TV show ever made. For the first time in my life I will give money for the series and, when the series is completed, buy the original box-set edition. It pains me to admit, but Tolkien is overthrown - I prefer "GOT" over "LOTR", both in a written and screened version.
I am not writing about its contents, there is more than enough spoilers all around the web, so no need for me to add some more. Thou, I do not understand all that noise and complaining about spoilers, especially if the movie/series is based on a famous book. In my opinion, you should always read the book before you watch it on TV, and if you did it then you already know most of what you'll see, so complaining about spoilers is ridiculous. And believe me, even if it is not always the case, in this case, you really SHOULD READ THE BOOKS FIRST. It is impossible to put all those thousands of pages in a TV show, and reading the books will allow you a much better understanding of what you see and you will enjoy the show much much more. I'm not saying that books are better. Not this time. Both are great in their own way. But the show will hypnotize you even deeper if you read the books first.
10/10
And what am I supposed to watch now that won't seem totally lame after seeing "GOT"…
11 February 2020
The eighth season is over and with it the already cult "Game of Thrones". The flood of spoilers and complaining over the last season receded, the dust settled, and it's time for me to finally see it in its entirety. I decided not to continue where I left off, but to start from the beginning and watch it without gigantic breaks between episodes and seasons.
Even before it starts, the series leaves you breathless with its phenomenal opening credits. Although a bit too long for my taste, it is certainly one of the most impressive introduction clips I have ever seen, mostly because of beautiful music by Ramin Djawadi.
"Game of Thrones", the first book of the cult saga "A Song of Ice and Fire," I first read in the summer of 2007. When I first sat down to watch the series in 2011, it seemed like the book was coming alive. Most of the scenes were shot exactly the way I imagined them while reading, and the cast is predominantly perfectly selected. I remember that only young Targaryens, and especially their hair, were torn in my eye. Emilia Clarke, in my opinion, is not beautiful/handsome enough or good enough actress for the role of Daenerys, and it took me more than a season to get used to her. Maisie Williams was initially very antipathic, but she quickly gained me with quality acting. The rest of the cast has been so impressive since the start that, when I continued reading the books, I began to imagine them exactly as they were shown in the series. What separates "Game of Thrones" the most from the majority of representatives of the genre is realistic characterization. There are no good guys and bad guys here, no black-and-white struggle between good and evil. All the characters are deeply layered and their good and bad sides take turns from situation to situation.
The first episode starts the series with force and ruthlessness, and although it is only a preliminary introduction to the story, it already manages to shock us on several occasions with its explicitness, vulgarity, and brutality. If you, while watching this episode, even for a moment felt discomfort, better stop here, because of what follows in the episodes and seasons that are in front of you your stomach will turn inside out.
Already in the second episode, Martin begins to kill innocent, ruthlessly introducing us into a world in which no one is safe, and in which the main characters are dropping like flies, alongside extras. Characters that die without any order, sense, and logic, whose stories remain incomplete because they are suddenly stricken by bad luck, are Martin's trademark. The series, as well as the source novel, constantly keeps you in a state of tension, because deaths, intrigues, and plot twists are totally unexpected and unpredictable, as is the real life.
Which brings us to the controversial last season. As far as I noticed, nagging about the last season is focused primarily on the script and the characters' illogical and unprovoked moves. I was bothered by the chaotic directing and editing. The episode depicting the battle against the army of the dead made my eyes literally hurt and, in my opinion, music was inadequate and irritating. But I have no major objections to the story itself. We are used to movies where the end logically follows from the introduction and plot, but it usually happens only in stories. Life is not logical, and I have already mentioned that Martin is quite realistic. People change, evolve, make plans, wage internal struggles, fight for a goal and, while the endings of most films show them failing or achieving those goals, life often stops those life paths with unexpected death and makes the whole journey meaningless. Death simply undoes us. Likewise, in the last season, Martin just canceled out a bunch of characters and their stories, while others acted impulsively, made fatal mistakes, or simply went mad. Many have completed their journeys in somewhat karmically acceptable ways, and the fates of some have surprised us. The season is a little hectic, but I don't think this story could have ended much differently, and I'm definitely not disappointed.
Last season, in my opinion, deserves no more than a seven or an eight, but the overall impression of the entire series remains
10/10
Weakest link, but still great
The fourth movie in the Pirates franchise is a bit below the level of its prequels, but that does not mean it's bad, it's just a bit less great. The story is linear this time, there are less plot and twists than before, and Penelope does not fit into this world so good, in my opinion. But Jack Sparrow is Jack Sparrow, the movie is visually beautiful and followed by music that crawls under my skin deeper and deeper with every sequel, becoming closer to be my favorite soundtrack ever. I can't wait for the 5th that is announced for 2017.
7,5/10
It is not top quality show, but what could you possibly expect from MTV... At the other hand, for those who love supernatural, show is fast, without idling, so pretty much fun.
7/10
Mind-blowing
This beautiful surreal movie is full of memorable lines that will make you reconsider your outlook on life, but this one is my favorite:
"At my age, the candles cost more than the cake. I'm not afraid of dying. I'm afraid I haven't been alive enough. It should be written on every schoolroom blackboard: Life is a playground - or nothing."
9/10
PG-13 | 130 min | Adventure, Family, Fantasy
There are a couple of pathetic scenes, but all in all maybe the best in the franchise.
8/10
Brings back the magic of childhood and I love it
The first season was very popular because it was a surprise and significant refreshment in the TV world. But after the first season, people started to complain that show does not fulfill its potential, that acting is bad, and soon that show is becoming unwatchable. I agree that it has its ups and downs and for a moment it looked like it will become complete crap, but it recovered soon enough and, though it has a tendency to complicate too much, originality of the plot and magical atmosphere have a mesmerizing influence on me. Last night I finished the 5th season and I cannot wait for 6th to be finished so I can watch it in one breath.
The plot combines the unbelievable amount of fairy-tales, myths, and legends into one complicated but believable and exciting story, where well-known characters from many different stories got new mutual relations. For example, Rumpelstiltskin and Belfire are son and grandson of Peter Pan. Daughter of Snow-white is in love with Captain Hook and Evil Queen is with Robin Hood. The show contains all genres, comedy, action, thriller, romance, drama, and it succeeds to be modern and at the same time preserve the magical atmosphere of childhood fairy-tales. Maybe it is not excellent in terms of acting and directing, but it is amazing in storytelling and bringing back that feel of childhood, and to me, it is more than enough to love it.
8,5/10
Underworld Franchise (2003-2016)
Still a better love story than Twilight :D
Set (predominantly) in the present day, this fantasy franchise tells us of a centuries-old war between vampires and werewolves. We follow the story from the perspective of Selene (Kate Beckinsale), one of the greatest vampire warriors, who leads the werewolf hunt. When she meets Michael (Scott Speedman), a man who is persecuted by werewolves for a mysterious reason, her life and worldviews change drastically. This saga has quite a well-crafted story and characterization, though as the franchise goes on, the quality of the story declines to eventually turn into a shallow action. The acting, the camera, the directing, the effects, the music ... it's all pretty well done, but nothing spectacular.
Underworld (2003)
The first film introduces us to the dark world of vampires and werewolves, which secretly coexists with ours. While vampires are a well-organized society with a powerful army, werewolves are a wild unleashed horde that is gradually exterminated by vampires. And then emerges a leader capable of uniting werewolves, as well as a man capable of uniting the features of both races in one hybrid being. A good thriller with a story that will intrigue you, and with just the right amount of romance and well-directed action.
7/10
Underworld: Evolution (2006)
"Evolution" continues directly to the first movie and now Selene and Michael are trying to break into the history and secrets of both races, in a desperate attempt to bring the centuries-old war to an end. A worthy sequel in the same manner and quality as the first film.
7/10
Underworld: Rise of the Lycans (2009)
"Rise of the Lycans" is an "origins story" and takes us into the Middle Ages. Vampires were aristocracy, and werewolves were their slaves, until the young werewolf Lucian rose into a leader who led his race in the struggle for liberation, thus beginning a centuries-old war between the two races. The franchise still holds a level.
7/10
Underworld: Awakening (2012)
Humans discover the existence of vampires and werewolves and decide to exterminate them. Michael and Selene are hit while fighting humans and she wakes up twelve years later, not knowing what happened to Michael. She now has a twelve-year-old daughter, the first natural-born hybrid, who she must protect from Lycans that want to take advantage of her in their fight for dominance.
The fourth film is slightly weaker than its predecessors. The action continues in the same manner, but the story is underdeveloped. I was under the impression that I was watching a long movie trailer, not the movie itself. But basically, I liked it.
6,5/10
Underworld: Blood Wars (2016)
The latest installment in the "Underworld" franchise is by far the worst, but not redundant. "Blood Wars" rounds off this saga, but it does a rather lousy job, and the movie is reduced to eighty minutes of shallow action and two-dimensional characters that are there just to keep the story from staying unfinished. I don't want to recommend it, but again, you have to see it if you wish to know how the story ends.
5/10
The secret project of creating a super-soldier goes wrong and, in order to cover up the whole thing, all volunteers who have been exposed to serum are killed. One manages to get away and lives in hiding until he saves the life of a young policewoman and falls in love with her. Then, of course, all possible complications begin. I know, it sounds sleasy, but the series is really well done. It combines elements of crime series with romance, thriller and a bit of horror. Jay Ryan is good in the role of the "beast", Kristin Kreuk is not particularly good actress, but she is beautiful enough for male audience to forgive her shortcomings in the performance, and Nina Lisandrello as her partner and Austin Basis as a computer magician and "beast's" best friend are great. The story is complicated and interesting, directing and effects are good and the series is very addictive. It has four seasons and it's finished, not canceled, so if you decide to watch, you will finish it pretty quickly and without waiting for new episodes or disappointments that the story has remained unresolved. Recommendation.
7,5/10
Damn you, Hollywood
Looks fantastic, but better if I don't comment storyline... 3 damn hours, and it's just one-third of the story. The Lord of the Rings is complex book 2.000 pages long, while Hobbit is easy-going bedtime story that takes one afternoon of reading, still, they made movies of the same size. That's madness. Hollywood is willing to destroy everything and anything just to grab as much money as possible when they assume something to be a potential chicken that lays golden eggs.
9/10 for visual part
7/10 overall impression
Fenomenalna prelepa ideja pretocena u retardiran film. Na IMDb sam video da su drugi moje misli vec savrseno iskazali pa cu jednostavno prekopirati citate.
Fenomenalna ideja: "Adam and Eden fell in love as teens despite the fact that they live on twinned worlds with gravities that pull in opposite directions. Ten years after a forced separation, Adam sets out on a dangerous quest to reconnect with his love."
Retardirana realizacija: "The visuals and CG are quite beautiful. There has been a lot of effort expended on the movies appearance. Unfortunately, it's a complete waste. If you like cynically criticizing cinematic stupidity while drinking with friends, this movie will prove very entertaining. Otherwise, if you are capable of finding IMDb and reading reviews, then it is highly unlikely this movie will not enrage you. The endless amount of loose ends, partial explanations, annoying narration, shallow dialogue, ... just raises the question of why? Beautiful, but relentlessly stupid."
Ideja 10/10
Realizacija: 4/10
7/10 [jer koliko god da je glup, previse je lep za manju ocenu]
It was a long time ago when I saw first season, but I think second one is quite better. Its shot better and it's more entertaining. The only flaw is Nicole Beharie's acting that is more goggling and making faces than acting, but when you get used to it, it will stop bothering you.
8/10
Length kills pleasure
It is amazing how they succeeded to make the Hobbit story boring. I had to struggle not to fall asleep. It looks fantastic, but it is simply way too long for the story it tells. Length kills pleasure. All qualities are in its shadow. So sad...
7/10
Harry Potter with horns :D
Warning: Spoilers
The title suggests that in the new "Harry Potter" some chick gave Harry the horns, and a good part of the movie leads us to think the same, but at the end, we find out that she only lied to him about that, for reasons I won't reveal now. Harry is still with Ginny, portrayed by different actress now, but she's also redhead, so it does not poke your eye too much. As Voldemort is killed in the last movie, we now have a new villain, hidden in the character of Harry's friend Lee, who has some resemblance to Tom Riddle. Lee is also in love with Ginny and his frustration piles up for many years. Finally, his attempt to rape her goes bad and he kills her. Harry is the last one who saw her alive so he gets accused of her murder. While he is trying to clear his name searching for the real murderer, strange horns start to grow on his forehead. Those horns have the magic power to bring the worst out of people and make them reveal their darkest secrets. At the same time, Nagini shows up to keep him company. She is a lot smaller than in previous movies, probably because she is now a real snake instead of CGI. In the end, Harry completely transforms into Devil and in the final battle against Lee they both get killed. Then instead of Nagini swallowing Lee up, Lee in his death rattle swallows Nagini. I'm still trying to understand the symbolism of this scene. Hermione is just supporting role here, she's blond now, works as a waitress, has a reputation of a slut and she finally had sex with Harry. She is also portrayed by a new actress, and, for some reason, names are changed to all characters in the movie. I suppose that's because this is a low budget movie and they did not pay copyright for characters. Although effects are terrible compared to all prequels, the story is more down to earth and very convincing and interesting. Oh, yes, I almost forgot... there is no Ron in this movie, but it easily goes unnoticed because he is pretty much redundant in all the movies so far.
P.S. Now seriously. Although this is nowhere near excellence, it is shot more than good. The acting is good and the movie contains some beautiful cinematography that you should really see for yourself.
7/10
"A zombie was doing heroin"
After the death of his parents and problems with the law, the young American randomly chooses Italy as a destination for a temporary escape from a gloomy life. There, he falls in love with a mysterious girl, who hides a primordial secret.
Labeling this film as a horror will lead you to the wrong expectations. It is a romantic drama with a Lovecraftian premise and atmosphere. The movie follows the development of the relationship between a young man and a young woman and the essential life decisions they have to make. The main feature of it is the spontaneity of their relationship and realistic dialogues, spiced with casual humor. The movie overall looks and develops naturally, as if we were watching footage from last year's summer vacation. The culmination brings more dramatic and quite creepy moments, but it doesn't make this movie even remotely horror, it only adds strength to a love story.
"Spring" is not for gentle sweethearts crying to romantic melodramas, nor for hardened horror fans. But if you have a little of both, and especially if you are a fan of Lovecraft's style, I warmly recommend this hidden gem.
8/10
"Sometimes the most thrilling thing a film can do is shake the shackles of its own preordained genre as you're watching it. The result might turn out to be a deal-breaking tonal trainwreck, but when such a hybrid works - and Spring, the second feature from directing team Aaron Moorhead and Justin Benson, does work - it can make for an improbably lovely experience." - Austin Chronicle
The best of three
The best of three, I managed to watch it in one breath, but I'm still not thrilled. The whole trilogy leaves the impression of a pale copy of the "Lord of the Rings".
8/10
Objectively, really nothing special, but, for some reason, I really enjoyed it. It deserves around 6, but I loved it for 10, so let it be
8/10
"I admit, I like different. And the movie is not like the average super-abilities (anti)hero stuff you can see. It's like a weird bridge between Jim Jarmusch style and typical superhero movies (although it almost completely lacks soundtrack in comparison). And Henry Rollins fits into that perfectly. With just a few words he can create a character deep and interesting. Other actors don't fall far behind as well. Booboo Stewart, Jordan Todosey and Kate Greenhouse show they got what it takes. To sum it up: it even doesn't matter that it's not quite accurate (quite far from, to be honest) to the mythology it's based on. Somehow they make it work." - Ostrowski
"He smelled of alcohol, decay, sweat, and urine, like a distillery in which the camel had died."
God exists. He lives in Brussels with his wife and daughter. God is a self-centered sadistic bully who, out of sheer boredom, created people to torture them. Most of his time he spends creating (Murphy's) laws by which the world will function, with the sole purpose to annoy, frustrate and harass humanity as much as possible, and the rest of the time he causes wars, accidents, and natural disasters. When his son tried to stop this terror and change the world for the better he ended up crucified. And now his ten-year-old daughter has had enough and she takes matters into her own hands. She runs away, appoints six apostles and writes "The Brand New Testament."
Ea: How do you choose apostles?
Jesus: Pretend like you know, no one will question you.
This surreal and absurdist black-humorous drama deals with eternal questions of the meaning of life, death, and love. Some accuse it of trying to impress by the quasi-philosophical depth, but I disagree with that. I would not say that this film fakes anything in any way. I have the impression that Jaco Van Dormael has come up with a good idea and simply let it grow and take its course, without restrictions and censorship.
The cast is excellent, and particularly prominent are Benoit Poelvoorde, in the role of crazed God, and young and cute Pili Groyne, who carries almost the entire movie, uniting the child's innocence and naivety with the wisdom and determination of the new messiah. Directing, cinematography and music are simply magical, and although the film has some technical shortcomings, it didn't bother me at all. I would say that some scenes pay homage to other films. I think I recognized "The Eighth Day", which also was written and directed by Jaco Van Dormael, then Kubrick's "The Shining" and Darabont's "The Shawshank Redemption", as well as several others for which I am not so sure.
This is the official Belgian submission for the 2016 Academy Awards. Competition must have been really strong when it did not pass. If this and my recommendation are not enough for you to watch it, the fact that it was created by the same man who was responsible for "The Eighth Day" and "Mr. Nobody" should prevail.
8,5/10
A masterpiece of fun for all ages
I saw it in the theater yesterday, and although it was not what I expected it to be, it was a very pleasant surprise. "Harry Potter" without Harry Potter is great.
While "Harry Potter" franchise is focused on children in Britain's magical community and adults and the magic in the rest of the world are mentioned only in passing, "Beasts" takes us to America where things are set differently. Something terrorize the city and slightly clumsy magical beasts lover, fired Auror, and muggle who was incidentally involved in all the mess are trying to solve the mystery and prevent the magical world being exposed. And in the focus of the story there is a magical suitcase that's bigger from the inside, as if it originated from Doctor Who's Tardis and Terry Pratchett's Luggage combined.
The movie is fast, resourceful, very witty and entertaining. The cast is excellent (Johnny Depp shows up only for a brief moment, but I hope they'll give him more space in sequels), CGI is great and there's lots of it, and magical beasts are truly fantastic. You'll fall in love with them for sure. The story doesn't have that epic feeling like "Harry Potter" had, but it is epic fun for all ages.
8,5/10
A crossbreed of "CSI" and "Once Upon a Time"
In the beginning, I wasn't sure if I will watch it or give up on it, but after a few episodes I was completely addicted. The show follows the usual pattern of crime dramas, but its focus is on cases that involve beings from fairy-tales. None of those aspects is new or original, but till now shows were focused either on one or another, while the way this show combines them is new and interesting, made to attract both fans of crime dramas like "CSI" and fans of fantasy like "Supernatural" or "Once Upon a Time". Warm recommendation to everyone, regardless of what genre you prefer.
8/10
Simplified but beautiful
This movie is an adaptation of the story from mid 18th century written by Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont. The original story is completely different and I prefer it to Disney's version, but I understand why did they have to take a totally different approach and I admit that the result is amazing. Still, I recommend you to read the original text because it will shine a new light on the story and give you insight in its depth and true meaning. Disney's movie is meaningful, but it's mostly just a fairy- tale, while the original has a much heavier background. This is the very first animated movie nominated for an Academy Award for the best picture. It didn't win it, but it won two other Oscars, for the original score and the title song.
8,5/10
Movie that left mark on countless generations
This is one of those movies that will last forever. Our grandmothers were watching it while they were just little girls and our grandchildren will enjoy it as much. Its values will never be outdated. One of those that define expression "classic". Only a shallow viewer could consider it to be just a fairy-tale for children, because this masterpiece is much more than that and its depth covers all generations. Although it's almost 80 years old it still resists the teeth of time, even visually. Its costumes and special effects are extremely outdated but still effective. I admit, it would be very interesting to see how it would all look like with today's technology, but I think this is one of those shrines that should not be touched.
10/10
Surprise
I thought I knew what to expect from Roger Corman's movie from 1963, inspired by Edgar Allan Poe and with Vincent Price, Boris Karloff and Peter Lorre in leading roles. Boy, was I surprised! What I did not expect was a comedy with Jack Nicholson! With Po's Raven this movie has very little connections. It's not particularly funny either. But it is pretty much entertaining and I'm always happy to see Price and Karloff. It's interesting to see Nicholson's beginnings too. To fans of Corman, Price and Karloff warm recommendations. The rest of you better skip it.
7/10
Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter... who could be drawn to a theater by this title?! I thought it must be either parody or some low-budget crap and I had no intention to watch it at all. Yet, curiosity prevailed. I decided to take a look at every 15 minutes or so, just to get a basic idea of what it looks like. I could expect anything from this movie, but I could not possibly expect it to be any good. And not only it is good, it is great.
The story is some kind of alternative history. It follows the life of Abraham Lincoln from early childhood to tragic death, but pervades his whole biography with vampires. It goes so far to claim vampires to be part of the cause of slavery in America and Civil War to be a war of human North against vampire-ruled South. It also gives a very interesting explanation of battle for Gettysburg. But I'll stop here to avoid serious spoilers.
Interesting, but not complicated. It has elements of drama, horror, romance, western, supernatural, historical, biographical and action movie. Intelligent and well written and packed dialogues with some humor relief. Choice and performances of the actors are great, good directing and soundtrack, high-level production and special effects that are literally breathtaking in some scenes, especially those that combine western and Matrix style.
Overall, I loved it.
9/10
Amazing and original idea, beautiful cinematography, good acting, but, in my opinion, story is not developed enough. Just opening part, that prepares us for main plot, could be movie on its own. It may be to much to make series out of this, but there is certainly enough material for at least two movies. They should've developed opening part further until they end up with two parts movie, first part taking place in the world of living and second part about adventures of our main character after he dies. This way, lasting less than two hours, first part is too hasty and sketchy, putting us right into main plot unprepared, without enough background. Potential masterpiece restricted to good, but not great film.
7,5/10
To begin with, I have to say I'm not Warcraft fan. I played the game occasionally, but I never gave too much thought to it nor read anything related to this lore, so I'm not competent to say if movie is faithful to original story or not. But I am fan of epic fantasy and it's my favorite genre. The only thing that somewhat bothered me was that two hours is not nearly enough to tell this story proper. Fact that movie feels incomplete is acceptable, cause it is obvious this is just the base for movies that will follow and this franchise looks very promising. But even just introduction to this world can not fit in only two hours. It needs at least three hours, or even two movies for this part of the story to be told right. Beside that I have no other objections. It is very good movie. But they call it The Lord of the Rings for the new generation. That's where I must draw a line. However good this movie is it is not worthy to be even compared to LOTR. Not only it is blasphemy to say that Warcraft is better or equally good, but they are beyond any comparison. Even after fifteen years nothing came even close to LOTR, let alone overthrow it from the throne of the genre. Maybe this movie standing alone deserves higher rating than what I rated it, and if there was no LOTR maybe I would rate it much higher, but LOTR set standards so high for this genre and in every single aspect it so much better than Warcraft, that on the scale where LOTR is ten, I simply can not give this movie more than seven. Still, I warmly recommend this adventure to all genre lovers and I can not wait for the sequels.
7/10
Twin Peaks Diarrh... Diary
There's a chance David Lynch is crazy. But I honestly doubt it. I think it's much more probable that he simply screws with us. We are struggling to understand his movies where there's, in fact, nothing to understand. He just stuffs his films with everything and anything that comes to his mind, without any sense and meaning, and then he sits aside and laughs his head off on our pathetic attempts to explain his outburst of "genius".
****
The first episode was promising. Strange, mysterious, distinctive. I was hypnotized. But in the second episode I was already at the edge of giving up. I was held only by curiosity. Now, after the third and fourth episode, I can not take this seriously anymore. I have a feeling that I'm watching high-budget parody to "Twin Peaks" instead of the long-awaited third season. Unlike first episode that mesmerized me and kept me in suspense, through third and fourth I mostly laughed, partly from agony, partly from shame transfer to which the show abounds, although there were also few really good jokes. But overall it feels like spoof made by the principle "it's so bad that it's good." I'm more and more convinced that Lynch really is screwing with us. David, I have no idea what you're on, but give us a little so we could feel nice too.
****
I really want to rate this movie ten out of ten although I know it definitely doesn't deserve it. But I wanna... For quite some time I was thinking how to write smart and competent review and I've got nothing so far. I can not hook you by short summary without spoiler risks. To abstract some deep thoughtful philosophy out of it I really don't want to even try. Even if there are some I didn't notice them. This movie is simply pure fun of epic proportions. There are some artistic cadres, trippy weird amazing and jaw dropping mindfaks, there's drama and pathetic, there's action and CGI intemperance, sanatorium and whorehouse, little bit of Kill Bill and a bit of Hobbit, alternative history, train hijacking, samurai and trench battles against Germans, incompatible epochs mixed in same scenes, there's everything and everything is awesome.
To lure mail audience, there's bunch of hot girls in sexy battle outfits, armed to teeth with swords and machine guns, who, in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Charlie's Angels and Matrix style, jump out of WWII airplane on running trains and medieval castles to butcher and riddle everything from people to zombies, robots, orcs, and eventually dragons. Complete madness. Zack Snyder is the king.
I do not like Emily Browning in leading role (my only objection to this movie), but Abbie Cornish, Jena Malone and divine Carla Gugino nailed it with both performances and looks.
9/10
The best of all Hammer movies I saw so far. Adaptation of legend of Countess Bathory, who bathed in the virgin's blood in order to preserve youth and beauty. There's no need to analyze particular elements of this movie cause it is great in every way. I have no objections at all.
8/10
Movie that succeeds to be at the same time bad movie and the best adaptation of legend of King Arthur and Knights of the Round Table. For 1981. it's visually fascinating and deserves Best Cinematography Oscar it's nominated for. But however magical and hypnotizing it may be, it's also full of flaws. It's poorly written, story is undeveloped, things just happen without explanation and movie makes rough time jumps without transition. Characters are two-dimensional and occasional attempts to add them some depth are tragicomic. With few exceptions, acting is better left uncommented. When I was a child I was stunned with this movie, but from current perspective, changed by few decades of movie experience, this movie is so hollow that I simply can not turn the blind eye to all its flaws, but still so beautiful that I can not rate it low either.
7/10
One of the best Disney feature films I saw so far. It's not on par with Pirates franchise or Lone Ranger, but it could not possibly be because it's completely kids-friendly. No one dies, there's no jokes inadequate for kids, it's tame fairy-tale, but it's beautifully written, designed and filmed and in the given limits it's the very best Disney movie I saw. I'm not sure, but I suppose that story is prequel to classic Wizard of Oz tale. Nothing here is superb, but there's no flaws either and I warmly recommend it to all fairy-tale and/or Mila Kunis fans.
8/10
This is probably the best adaptation of Peter Pan and it deserves place in movie classics. The reason it had low success in theaters and it passed almost unnoticed lies not in its quality, but in fact it was released in the middle of Harry Potter mania and at the same time with the best fantasy movie of all time - The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. Practically nothing had real chance competing with those two.
This is classic version of Peter Pan, but really excellent one. Production is top, although not on LOTR level. Kids are incredibly cute and they played their roles really well and scenery is beautiful. Few times I thought that CGI is bit unconvincing, but I think it's done on purpose to make distinction between real world and world of fantasy. What particularly distinguishes this adaptation is the relationship between Peter and Wendy, which is elevated to a higher level than the one we are used to. Here they are not just children, but preteens who develop early stage of romantic love and even some sort of sexual tension. That deepens their relationship and adds new dimension to the story, that is not just two-dimensional fairy-tale any more, like it was in animated Disney version. Warm recommendation.
8/10
"Truth" behind Sleeping Beauty fairy-tale, told from the point of view of "evil" fairy who cast the curse. Disney finally decided to leave behind black-and-white, two-dimensional, "good vs evil" way of portraying the world and released magnificent anti-hero movie in shades of grey. "Heroes" do not look so innocent any more and "villain" gets proper background story that explains how it came to the story we remember from our childhood. Either this story has no holes or I missed them being hypnotized by beautiful scenery and wonderful effects. Elle Fanning is not as beautiful as her character name tells but she played her role very well, while Angelina Jolie nailed hers. There's no point to further analyze this movie because I have no objections at all and if I start praising its qualities it could take forever. It's simply perfect, maybe even the best Disney feature film so far. Although it's tight race with Pirates.
10/10
"It takes the story of the book, turns it upside down, shakes it, reconfigures it, and makes it many things, including funnier, more televisual, and broader in scope."
The only thing that gave Shadow the strength to get through the prison days was the beloved woman waiting for him at home. When he was released prematurely, so that he could attend her funeral, that freedom meant nothing to him anymore. This mental state of his was used by the mysterious Mr. Wednesday, to win him over to his service.
We soon find out the circumstances under which Shadow's wife died, and the nature of his new job is slowly being revealed and the series "American Gods" turns into a crazy adventure, full of violence, sex, and creatures from various mythologies from all over the world.
I read Neil Gaiman's eponymous novel, on which the series is based, back in 2004, so I'm not sure how much "American Gods" conveys the events from the book, and how much of the script is original material, but many changes are more than obvious.
Much of the series is tailored to modern trends of racial, religious, and sexual diversity, and the flow of politically colored messages.
The most obvious example is the choice of Ricky Whittle for the role of Shadow. Nowhere in the novel "American Gods" did Gaiman clearly indicate Shadow's racial affiliation. It has been suggested that he is dark-skinned and of mixed origin, which could be black, but also Gypsy or Indian. The choice of a black actor opened the possibility for the series to deal more seriously with racism, which the book does not deal with in such a direct way, but which is always a current topic in America.
Female characters are given much more space than in the book, and some of the female characters mentioned only along the way got some of the most important roles here. Especially Shadow's wife, who has one of the main roles in the series "American Gods", side by side with the main characters of the novel.
Although politicization in adaptations of books, which originally don't bother with it, is really going on my nerves, these changes and scenes are quite nicely integrated into the original story and, in my opinion, they more contribute to Gaiman's universe than they turn the series from his way.
The series also includes homosexual characters of both sexes, which I don't remember from the book (although I allow the possibility that I am wrong) and, unlike many films and series that force them just to respect the norm, here it is done somehow naturally, and even some slightly more explicit scenes were shot with style and taste. The only exception is an episode almost drowned by an endless scene of rather explicit homosexual orgies, which has neither a substantive nor an aesthetic place in "American Gods".
The story is original, weird, and holds attention. The show is visually fantastic and the choice of actors and their performances are excellent. I can't say that I'm thrilled, but I really liked the series and I don't understand how it is possible for its ratings to drop to such an extent that they cancel it.
The third season ended with a very impressive scene that can be a cliffhanger for the continuation of the story, but in a way, it rounds off the previous story and gives the series, although a bit depressing, a satisfactorily meaningful ending. So, even if we don't get the true ending in the form of the fourth season or maybe a feature film (both possibilities are still in circulation), feel free to embark on this adventure, because you won't waste time, as is the case with most canceled series.
8/10
WTF I just watched?! When I sat to watch this movie I expected something like Power Rangers repacked into comedy. During first half an hour I believed I'll give up any minute now. But somehow I found myself completely pulled in the story which caught me unprepared for what it brings. Forget about trailers and what you heard about genre and story and enter this adventure without any prejudice. It's the only way. Any expectation will only bring you disappointment while if you have none you are in for pleasant surprise. IMDb says action-comedy which is nonsense. Technically this is SF drama, essentially it's black-humorous allegory. Story is very original. It's told plain and simple and to audience, accustomed to popular complicated scenarios with plenty of surprises and twists, it may seem boring. But to me it was welcome refreshment and example how even with little can be shown a lot. I want to commend excellent performance of Anne Hathaway and recommend you this, in my opinion, strong seven.
7,5/10
In my opinion,this is one of the best movies of all time. I'm shocked that it has no Oscar nominations. Pacino definitely deserves one for almost every movie he was in. But it won Saturn award for the best horror... really?! Horror?! In which universe is this movie a horror?! It's drama, it may pass for thriller or mystery, but to say it's horror is complete nonsense. I suppose everyone saw this movie, but to those who saw it just once I recommend watching it again, because this movie is full of ingenious lines that in first watching mostly pass unnoticed, because without knowing how movie ends they seem casual and irrelevant, and they're not. In spite of the fact that the main role is entrusted to Keanu Reeves, the story and other actors are so strong that the film is a pure
10/10
Nightbreed is an adaptation of Barker's novel Cabal from 1988. As I love this book very much, and Barker personally adapted it into screenplay and directed the film, I'm probably not able to observe it objectively. With exception of, from today's perspective, outdated special effects, this movie is perfect fantasy/horror action. Twenty years ago, when I first read the book and saw the movie, I was amazed. Now after watching it again I'm giving it strong eight. Role of main villain is played by David Cronenberg, and some fantasy and horror writers, including Neil Gaiman, also have brief appearances. Unlike the book that is genius, the film does not have a particular depth or characterization, but it has a phenomenal atmosphere and very interesting and original "monsters", as well as great music. I recommend you to watch director's cut and make sure you read the book.
8/10
Since I liked the original "Jumanji" and I love Robin Williams, when I saw the announcements for the film with Dwayne Johnson in the main role and then the trailer, I expected another one in a row of poor remakes. Internet reviews and comments made me completely giving up on it. But my girl wanted to see it and I'm thankful for that.
"Welcome to the Jungle" is neither remake nor sequel of "Jumanji" (1995). Instead, it only takes the idea from the original, approaches it differently and modernizes it, so the story has practically no touch points with a movie from the nineties. The screenplay is interesting, movie is visually great, but the main advantages of this film are the actors and plenty of humor. Jumanji is now a video game and four teenagers, entering into it, become complete opposite of their physical and psychological traits in the real world. When The Rock plays a cowardly nerd and Jack Black is a narcissistic and superficial girl, whose life comes down to Instagram, hilarious fun is guaranteed. Movie I'll certainly see few more times.
8/10
Excellent thriller with a lousy finale
I watched first 6 (out of 37) episodes and I'm hooked. Although this type of animation goes on my nerves, it's not as bad as in other anime I encountered so far, and the story is so good that I have to see it through, no matter retarded looks of Shinigami and all the other flaws of the genre. This would be excellent feature thriller, either movie or series. If possible, in Japanese or European production, although I doubt even Hollywood could screw it too much. But, speculation on the side, in this form, I rate it
8/10
As the series progressed, I was more and more tempted to give it a 9, or even 10, but the last episode was a real disappointment. Someone who has been living a triple life for six years and playing the game at such a high level would not make such an amateur mistake. I knew they will get him eventually, but I was expecting some highly intelligent mindfak, not the outworn cliche of a villain exulting in the face of the enemy before his plan succeeded. Final rating
8,5/10
One of the best soundtracks ever
This adult animated sci-fi/fantasy movie is an anthology of stories adapted from the magazine of the same name and original stories in the same spirit. It's full of violence and nudity and accompanied by the music of great rock and metal names of its time, including Sammy Hagar, Blue Öyster Cult, Cheap Trick, Don Felder, Nazareth, Journey, Stevie Nicks and legendary Black Sabbath. I think it gained cult status more because of its name, awesome music and naked women, than its objective quality, but although it's now outdated, those who grew up in eighties and nineties will understand its greatness, even if they're watching it now for the first time.
8/10
Every few days, a girl from a small Japan town wakes up in the body of a Tokyo boy, and soon realizes that at the same time he takes over hers. On these occasions, they have to live each other's day, trying not to cause problems to each other. They begin to find ways to communicate with each other to make all this easier to work out. What they have yet to understand is that the situation is much more complicated than it first appears, and that on two of them depends survival of many people. I can not go deeper into the story to avoid spoilers, but believe me, you do not want to miss this movie. I really do not like anime, but this time I'm thrilled.
9,5/10
Old school fairy tale, with princess, elves, fairies, dwarfs, unicorns, goblins and, of course, prince of darkness. I'm not one of those who think that fairy tales are for children only, moreover I like them very much. But this one is really just for kids. It's beautifully done, with, for its time, stunning visuals, nice soundtrack and good acting (as good as possible considering Tom Cruise in leading role), but, targeting mainly children, story is too linear and predictable and whole movie is too restrained for my taste. The strongest impression on me left makeup of fairy tale creatures, especially Tim Curry as Darkness. For these masks, this movie deserved the Oscar, not only the nomination.
7/10
Terribly underrated
"Ghost Rider" has very low ratings and reputation of one of the worst Marvel movies, and it slowly starts to worry me that this is an increasingly common case with my favorite movies. I'm watching Marvel chronologically, and of the 24 films and series I've seen so far, this one is in my top 5. I can not say I'm amazed, but it was close enough.
The story is one of the most powerful in the Marvel universe, and a dark and fairly serious atmosphere is more in the spirit of DC than Marvel. Considering one of the lowest budgets in the genre, the film is very well done and I have no objections from the technical side. An excellent balance of action, drama and humor, which is rare in Marvel films, keeps the attention from start to finish and, if you are a more careful observer or you watch it several times, you will notice a lot of interesting details. There are Bible quotes, characters borrowed from other Marvel stories, references to "Apocalypse Now" (a film directed by Nikoilas' uncle), scenes made as a homage to painters and all sorts of interesting stuff.
It is interesting fact that Nicolas Cage is a big fan of comics, especially this one, so he fought tooth and nail to get this role, and even has a tattoo of Ghost Rider that they had to hide when shooting. He is such a fan(atic) that he took his stage name from comic character Luke Cage, and he named his son Kal-El after Superman. Director does not fall far behind Cage, because he gave money from his pocket for shooting some of the scenes that the studio didn't approve. All in all, this is the movie that true lovers of comics made from the heart, and it's really sad that it is so badly (un)accepted by the audience and criticism. I rate it strong eight.
8/10
"Todd and the Book of Pure Evil" was TV series that was broadcast from 2010 till 2012, and I already wrote about it:
"This is simply awesome. Combination of high-school show, comedy and horror, that packs cliches of '80s and '90s into catchy 20 minutes portions of pure fun. All accompanied with lots of weed and heavy metal. Plus, in main supporting role we have Jason Mewes, Jay from legendary Jay and Silent Bob duo. The only flaw of this show is that it was canceled after two seasons, so main story is left incomplete. However, every episode has own rounded plot so they can be watched separately. Also, animated movie that should finish the story is announced and it's expected very soon. Recommendation for everyone who love metal, weed, '80s horrors, teen comedies, things so stupid that they're ingenious and good fun. I saw all 26 episodes in just a few days and I yearn for more.
9/10"
At the time show was cancelled, authors had scenario prepared for total of four seasons so, for the story not to remain incomplete, they announced that they would pack the remaining two seasons into a full-length animated film. I was eagerly awaiting the day when they will finally release this cartoon, but eventually I made peace with the fact that it will not happen. And then, six years after the cancellation of the series, "The End of the End" really appeared.
The animation of characters very faithfully mimics actors from the series, and the voices are given to them by the original cast. The story continues in the same manner as in the first two seasons but, due to the shortening of the entire two seasons into a 80 minutes film, the decline in the quality of the story is more than obvious. And the cartoon simply can not replace the atmosphere of the original show. It does not make sense to watch this movie if you have not watched the series, and it is pretty much lousy standing alone, but for a big fans of the series, such as myself, it's great, on the one hand because I finally learned how the story ends and on the other because of nostalgia. Objectively it doesn'tt deserve such a high grade, but love is stronger than reason and I rate it
7/10
This movie is simultaneously extremely stupid and awesome. Although "Kick-Ass" is much better, this movie is for epic fantasy what "Kick-Ass" is for the superhero genre. If you like FRP, LARP, epic fantasy, B horrors and heavy metal, or if you were the fan of "Todd and the Book of Pure Evil" series, this is something you simply must not miss.
In the middle of some forest nowhere a big live-action fantasy role play tournament is held, but one of the "wizards" accidentally uses the real spell and the innocent game turns into real bloodshed.
Story and characters are not particularly well-developed and everything is two-dimensional, so in combination with a small budget we get a production fiasco. On the other hand, the idea is great, the gore scenes are fun and the cast is fantastic. In the leading roles there are legendary Tyrion Lannister, nerdy Steve Zahn, then Ryan Kwanten and cutest sexy ballerina Summer Glau, whom I am in love with since the "Firefly" series.
I rate it seven, which is the average grade between its objective (un)quality and my enthusiasm.
7/10
A good movie that missed the opportunity to be great
This film had all the preconditions to be a masterpiece of the genre: an excellent, fairly original idea, a big budget and an incredible cast. Unfortunately, the realization is just slightly above the average.
The idea was developed in a decent story, but it could have been much better. The effects are good, but not breathtaking, and the acting team is literally wasted. Ben Stiller almost alone carries the entire film, while top actors who surround him are totally unused. Robin Williams, one of the greatest names of the comedy, who turns even a bad role into gold, has such a small and uninteresting role that he simply did not have the opportunity to shine, and even that little time he was given he did not use well. In my opinion, this was his worst role. Enchanting Carla Gugino has no purpose in this movie. She was thrown into the story for the element of romance with Ben Stiller, but neither romance was given the chance to happen, nor did her character have any other function in the film, so her role is completely redundant. The same goes for Jake Cherry, because the relationship between father and son, which should have been one of the backbones of the film, was so superficially shown that they could easily leave it out completely. Trio Bill Cobbs, Mickey Rooney and Dick Van Dyke was an unexpected but pleasant surprise in this film. These three veterans, with their appearance alone, raise the rating of the movie at least one star. Ricky Gervais seems to be improvising all the time and, although he plays a very small role, he greatly contributes to the entertainment of the film. There are many more interesting characters in the film, but I will mention only Patrick Gallagher, Steve Coogan and Owen Wilson, because they left the strongest impression on me.
The disadvantages of this film are, in my opinion, quite big, but its qualities and the fantastic cast not only compensate for, but also overcome its flaws, so the film is very watchable, quite entertaining and at times hilarious.
7/10
Blues ain't nothing but a good man feelin' bad...
A young student of a classical guitar dreams of becoming a recognized blues musician. He meets harmonica legend Willie Brown, played by Joe Seneca, and together they start a journey from New York to Mississippi Delta, a kid hoping to learn the lost song of the legendary Robert Johnson and Willie in order to cancel his contract with the Devil. On the way, they meet various characters and they experience interesting adventures, through which the naive boy slowly mature into a real blues player.
I refuse to analyze and objectively evaluate this film. In movies with a soul like this objective quality is essentially irrelevant. I will only mention the good acting and superb music, for which are most responsible Ry Cooder and Steve Vai.
I can not rate it ten, because I would not go so far as to place it among the best movies of all time, but, considering how many times I saw it, how many more times I will watch it in the future and the emotions it awakes in me every time, I can not rate it lower than
9/10
Nothing special, but fun enough. It even won one Oscar.
7/10
A worthy successor
"Heavy Metal 2000" is a worthy successor to 1981's "Heavy Metal". Made in the style of the original, it has a strong reminiscent of the eighties. Unlike the first one that is an omnibus, this one has only one story, but the story and characters at the level of the first movie. There is a bit less nudity and violence, and the soundtrack, although weaker than the one from the '80s, has several really good tracks, performed by the great names of its time. Those who loved the first should likewise love this one.
7/10
"The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown." - H.P. Lovecraft
I'm not a fan of documentaries, but this one I just had to see. A documentary about Lovecraft, the father of modern horror, from the corner of the great names of the genre, such as Nile Gaiman, one of my favorite writers, then Peter Straub, who collaborated with Stephen King on the "Talisman" novel, directors by Guillermo del Toro, Stuart Gordon and John Carpenter, and others. Technically, the film is well-made, combining a narrative about the life and work of H.P. Lovecraft, with interviews with the aforementioned giants, as well as with movies, music and paintings inspired by Lovecraft. The film has a good pace and at no time is it boring, but it is essentially quite basic and made primarily for the people who know little or nothing about this legend. Although I only got some new information about Lovecraft's biography, while I did not find out anything new about his work, I enjoyed listening to my favorite writers and directors talking about Lovecraft with love. Recommendation.
7/10
You couldn't just stick to Monopoly...
Two siblings move to a new house and find an unusual board game in the attic. Magical board game. The most entertaining board game ever ... for us. For them, potentially lethal.
When it came out I was a teenager and I was thrilled. From this perspective, the film is outdated and naive, but still quite fun. Robin Williams does not shine with his full splendor, but he is certainly better than in "Night at the Museum", with which this film has a lot of similarities. Kirsten Dunst is very good in one of her first major roles, but just one year after "Interview with the Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles" this role is too bleak to leave a stronger impression. I didn't see all of her movies, but from what I did, the role of Claudia is unquestionably her best and I doubt she could ever outclass it. The effects are very naive, though not bad, and if you enter this adventure without high expectations you will surely have a good time.
7,5/10
Disappointment
"Alice in Wonderland" by Lewis Carroll, directed by Tim Burton (whom I love), starring celebrities like Johnny Depp (whom I adore), Helena Bonham Carter, Anne Hathaway, Crispin Glover, Stephen Fry, Alan Rickman and legendary Christopher Lee, with technical capabilities of year 2010 and a $ 200 million budget ... You can not blame me for having high expectations. And when you see this wonder of wasted potential you won't blame me for being disappointed either.
The film is visually impressive and I really have no complaints, but everything else is lousy. Tim Burton didn't really fail, but we all know that he can do it much much better. Mad Hatter is one of Depp's weakest roles, Mia Wasikowska is sweet and she played Alice quite decent, and only Helena Bonham Carter really made an impression on me. The story is cute but lousy, it's not boring, but it doesn't engage you as much as such adventure should. You will not have the urge to turn off the movie, but you will not be upset if you need to leave it in half. However, I'm not sure how much is that the fault of unimaginative screenwriter and director (it certainly isn't Carroll's fault), and how much is this actually result of this being Disney movie primarily intended for children, which imposes many limitations. But the fact that the film is intended for children is just an explanation, and not an excuse for a naive, shallow and too simple story. A quality movie for children should be multilayered, on the first glance simple enough to entertain children, but with a certain depth that will intrigue adults. This movie doesn't have that. If you are out of elementary school you're too old for this.
6/10
Unfairly underrated
I sat to watch this movie full of prejudice based on bad reviews, and in the beginning, I was thinking to give up on it. But, I saw it through and my opinion has completely changed. This is a very good movie. Almost all arguments against this movie are based on the premise that it is a remake of the cult classic from 1968. If that was the case, compared to the original, this movie sucks. But it is a very wrong angle and it is understandable that conclusions based on the wrong premise, filled with emotion and prejudice, will be wrong conclusions.
Just try to watch this movie from a point of view of someone who did not see the original franchise and have no idea what is it all about, and you'll enjoy a great movie. Because this is not really a remake. The only thing they share is the basic idea that in distant future apes will rule the Earth. Other than that those are two completely different movies. Characters are new and different, the story begins slightly similar, but develops and ends completely different. This is typical Tim Burton's dark fairy-tale, original in every way, except for stealing the basic idea from cult classic. The story is interesting and brings completely new ideas that make it essentially different from 1968 movie. The way apes rise to be on the top of the evolutionary scale, the event that stops the battle and the way the main character ends his adventure are three main and totally unexpected twists that are completely new. I saw all five movies from the old franchise and I was still surprised by every plot twist here. Nothing was already seen or too predictable. Because this is not really a remake. The crash-landing scene is the only one visually similar to '60s movie. But if you think about it, he had to land somehow, and there are not so many ways to do it and survive. I mean, he could not teleport himself or catapult from ship and land by parachute from outer space...
8/10
"In the beginning... The angel Lucifer was cast out of Heaven and condemned to rule Hell for all eternity. Until he decided to take vacation..."
The Devil was sick of Hell, so he moved to Los Angeles and opened a nightclub, where he spends his days and nights living the motto "sex, drugs and rock'n'roll". Until he falls in love with police detective Chloe and becomes her civilian consultant. Each episode brings a new case of murder that Chloe and Lucifer solve by combining her detective and his supernatural abilities, with Chloe not knowing that he really is the Devil. The murder cases are quite original, the ways they are solved are cleverly designed and interesting, and the mutual relations of the characters are entertainingly complex and imbued with great humor. Over time, the series introduces more and more new characters and celestial beings, but it succeeds in maintaining the level of development of characters and their interrelations, and not getting lost in exaggeration and excessive complicating. The characters are diverse, well developed and there's one for everyone's taste. Personally, I prefer Mazikeen, the main torturer in Hell and Lucifer's bodyguard, although they somewhat spoiled her in the third season.
DC Entertainment has surpassed itself this time. "Lucifer" is so far the best DC series and I do not understand why they decided to shut it down after just three seasons. Fortunately, Netflix has purchased the rights and in 2019 we can expect the fourth season. Warm recommendation to fans of humorous, crime and supernatural series, because "Lucifer" is a perfectly balanced mix of these genres.
8,5/10
Slightly better than the first one
If you glue this movie directly to the end of the previous one from 2010, you probably wouldn't even notice that it's two films. So, everything I wrote about "Alice in Wonderland" stands for this one too. However, this one is perhaps slightly more entertaining.
6,5/10
From the perspective of the ten-year-old kid, I could maybe raise it to 8/10.
Alice in Wonderland (2010)
Disappointment
29 August 2018
"Alice in Wonderland" by Lewis Carroll, directed by Tim Burton (whom I love), starring celebrities like Johnny Depp (whom I adore), Helena Bonham Carter, Anne Hathaway, Crispin Glover, Stephen Fry, Alan Rickman and legendary Christopher Lee, with technical capabilities of year 2010 and a $ 200 million budget ... You can not blame me for having high expectations. And when you see this wonder of wasted potential you won't blame me for being disappointed either.
The film is visually impressive and I really have no complaints, but everything else is lousy. Tim Burton didn't really fail, but we all know that he can do it much much better. Mad Hatter is one of Depp's weakest roles, Mia Wasikowska is sweet and she played Alice quite decent, and only Helena Bonham Carter really made an impression on me. The story is cute but lousy, it's not boring, but it doesn't engage you as much as such adventure should. You will not have the urge to turn off the movie, but you will not be upset if you need to leave it in half. However, I'm not sure how much is that the fault of unimaginative screenwriter and director (it certainly isn't Carroll's fault), and how much is this actually result of this being Disney movie primarily intended for children, which imposes many limitations. But the fact that the film is intended for children is just an explanation, and not an excuse for a naive, shallow and too simple story. A quality movie for children should be multilayered, on the first glance simple enough to entertain children, but with a certain depth that will intrigue adults. This movie doesn't have that. If you are out of elementary school you're too old for this.
6/10
Care for a little necrophilia?
This surreal satire was inspired by George Orwell's "1984" and it's second in Terry Gilliam's "Trilogy of Imagination", first being "Time Bandits" from 1981 and third "The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" from 1988. Placed in a retro-futuristic dystopian world, which is completely drowned in bureaucracy, it shows everyone as just a cogwheel in this absurd machine. Movie is full of more or less obvious details that show us the reality we live in, in caricatured and exaggerated way, but essentially it's a warning what modern society is degrading to become - one huge more and more complicated machine that seemingly tends to perfection, but the more complex it becomes the more it loses its purpose, while essentially destroys humanity in every possible way.
Our main character is a clerk who seems to be satisfied with living an indistinctive life of small cogwheel, but in his dreams, he is flying through clouds, where he meets the lovely woman. Subconsciously, the man trapped by the system dreams of freedom and love. When a simple typo in paperwork causes an innocent man to die, he attempts to correct this mistake and doing so he meets the woman from his dreams in real life. Now he digs deeper and deeper into government machine, trying to find out about her, and the line between his dreams and reality fades.
The cast is phenomenal. The leading role is entrusted to Jonathan Pryce, and to support him there are Robert De Niro, in small but striking role, Ian Holm (Bilbo Baggins), Bob Hoskins (Super Mario), Michael Palin (Monty Python), Peter Vaughan (Maester Aemon from GoT), Jim Broadbent (he has too many great roles for me to chose from, but let's say Harold Zidler from Moulin Rouge), and many more. You'll find some beautiful camera work here. Dream sequences are breathtaking. Visually impressive, but gloomy and disturbing. The movie has a grace of film noir. It's drama, but with a certain sense for black humor. Watching this madness of symbolism and metaphors was one quite strange experience which is hard to describe. You should see, or better say, feel it for yourself. Strong recommendation.
10/10
There's hope for fantasy genre in Serbia
"Sheitan Warrior" is Serbian homage to teenage slasher-horror-comedy movies from the eighties and, if you are at least a bit familiar with this genre, there's no need for me to describe you the story itself. The movie combines elements typical of high school comedies from the '80s and '90s with a slasher-horror story in the style of Freddy Krueger or Jason, but does it in the Serbian way. Here you will find a comedy based on a social critique of the society, characters who are representatives of various classes and groups that the local audience will easily recognize, especially if they grew up in the nineties, but also interesting pseudo-historical/mythological elements that we have not met before in domestic cinema. In terms of effects and production, "Warrior" is lagging behind the world, but it is also quite ahead of what we are accustomed in the domestic film and its flaws are quite covered by good directing and acting. The cast is mostly amateur, but in minor roles there are also many great names of domestic cinema and theater, such as Petar Bozovic, Svetlana Bojkovic, Marko Nikolic (for the third time in his career in the role of Karadjordje), Branislav Lecic, Dragan Nikolic, Irfan Mensur, Teofil Pancic, Eva Ras, as well as Bora Djordjevic. The amateur part of the cast is occasionally over-the-top, with several shame-transfers, but it is possible that it is deliberate. Most of the kids very convincingly play typical representatives of various teenage groups, and Vladimir Tesovic is simply hilarious in the role of nerd who is constantly bullied, which drives him to utter madness and makes him turn to the forces of evil.
Objectively, in terms of world cinema, this is not a particularly good movie, and probably does not deserve the rating I gave it, but considering that, for this climate, the film is quite genuine and brings a breeze of freshness to the stale Serbian scene, as well as the fact that it is made by inexperienced students with a budget ridiculous for such a project, as well as invested effort worth every respect, from this point of view rating seven is an insultingly low.
7/10
Can you imagine portal to someone else's head?
You don't have to. Just watch this twisted masterpiece. I have no clue how anyone came to this awesome idea, but its originality itself is enough to make this movie worth your time. When you add good director and a great cast in the story full of weird surprises, you get one unforgettable piece of cinematography and an excellent entertainment.
8/10
Jailbait Jennifer Connelly vs. creepy David Bowie
A teenage girl, who spends much of her time in her fantasy world, got tired of babysitting her little brother whenever their parents leave home. On one occasion, when the baby wouldn't stop crying, she wished out-loud for goblins to take him away, so she can finally have some peace. But she couldn't imagine that this would really happen. Now she has just thirteen hours left before her brother is forever turned into a goblin, and in front of her there is a huge magic labyrinth, in the center of which is the castle where the Goblin King holds her baby brother.
The film was directed by Jim Henson, who is also the author of the original story. This fairy-tale adventure for children in many ways reminiscent of the more famous "Wizard of Oz," "Alice in Wonderland" and "The Neverending Story" and, if I remember correctly, I would say that from them even borrows certain characters and situations. A large number of actresses auditioned for the lead, and Jennifer Connelly won it. She certainly is a much better choice than Sarah Jessica Parker or Laura Dern, but also unfathomable to me because Helena Bonham Carter and Marisa Tomei also were in competition. Goblin King is portrayed by David Bowie, who is also the author and performer of all the songs in the film. When I first watched this movie, as a kid in the late eighties, at the same time I was fascinated and terrified, and for years after that Bowie was creeping me out. And just one more interesting trivia - an owl from the very beginning of the film is the first attempt of a realistic CGI animal in a feature film.
7,5/10
All bow to Princess Kenny
South Park's authors should be given the Nobel Oscars for Lifetime Achievement. These people are completely nuts. It is the fact that everyday life is an inexhaustible source of inspiration for mockery, but South Park does it better than anyone else. This time they made a parody of "Game of Thrones" and spiced it by ridiculing "The Lord of the Rings", "Star Wars" and other cult franchises, along the way, poking gamers, global corporations, the media and more. And all that in the form of TRILOGY. Be sure not to miss episodes 7-9 of the seventeenth season. It was a rather painful experience, because it is quite inconvenient to laugh like crazy while your jaw stiffened in disbelief.
10/10
Comparison with "Brazil" is blasphemous
When I saw Gilliam's "Brazil" I was amazed, so I googled about it and found out it was part of so-called "Trilogy of Imagination". Naturally, I decided to see the other two movies. "Time Bandits" is the first part of this trilogy and tells the story about eleven years old boy who accidentally joins a group of time-traveling stealing dwarfs. The story leads us to the palace of King Agamemnon, in Sherwood and in the midst of Napoleon's conquests, but if, based on this brief description, you expect good entertainment, you will be disappointed. The premise is interesting, but the realization in the form of fairy-tale adventure for children does not offer almost anything to adults. With the film "Brazil" this achievement shares a similar "feeling", great camera and directing, and effects are really good for its time. The cast is at the very least fascinating and includes names such as John Cleese, Sean Connery, Shelley Duvall, Ian Holm, Michael Palin, Ralph Richardson, Peter Vaughan, David Warner, and Jim Broadbent. But the story itself is poorly written. A lot of random events, too chaotic to be receptive to children, and meaningless to adults. There is no real plot here, but only interesting ideas scattered through the futile film, and if the aim was a satire, I must admit I noticed some here and there, but nothing more than that. True, the movie somewhat holds attention because it keeps you in anticipation of what's coming. Unfortunately, the answer to that question is - nothing. If it was not technically so good and with such a great cast, I would probably give up on it halfway through.
6,5/10
You are disgusting, I like that in a person
"Needful Things" is an adaptation of Stephen King's novel of the same name. It is heavily judged by the fans of the book, but for us who didn't read it, this is a pretty good movie. Mysterious older gentleman moves to Castle Rock, King's fictional town in Maine that you can often encounter in his work, and opens some Kind of antique shop, where everyone can find what they desire the most. But the owner isn't interested as much in their money as he wants his customers to do some favors for him. These seemingly small favors, in mutual interaction, threaten to turn this peaceful town into the scene of the local apocalypse.
I can imagine that screenplay probably butchered the original material, but for us who didn't read it, this is quite decent and very imaginative story. There is a variety of interesting and quite well-developed characters, and cast and their performances are probably the strongest quality of this movie. Ed Harris is expectedly good in the role of the local sheriff that saves the day, and Max von Sydow is a perfect mysterious salesman. There's also Amanda Plummer, Honey Bunny from "Pulp Fiction", whose character is one of the most interesting ones and whose clash with Valri Bromfield is, in my opinion, the most powerful scene in the movie. In one of the main roles is Bruce Willis' wife from "Die Hard", sexy Bonnie Bedelia, as well as Duncan Fraser in the role of a priest. Directing and camera have several really good moments, effects are totally decent for their time, and also there are few quite nice slasher/gore scenes. Admittedly, the movie lacks some seriousness and suspense and overall atmosphere seems more like an adaptation of comic-book than a novel. For my taste, it's not a bad thing, although it's hard for me to consider it a horror movie. But to be honest, King essentially isn't a horror writer at all, King is a genre of its own.
7,5/10
Unintentional comedy
As a child, in the late eighties, I loved this movie and I was able to watch it over and over again countless times. Three decades later I spent two hours in nostalgic boredom. This movie can be good only to a child, and ironically, it's R rated and not intended for children. It is based on an interesting idea about the existence of a small number of immortals scattered around the globe and destined to wait for a certain time when they'll meet and fight each other until there's only one left. Unfortunately, this premise is not well-developed and it's full of holes and illogicalities. The wooden acting of Christopher Lambert is plain boring, while the brilliant Sean Connery is totally underutilized and Clancy Brown is at the same time the main villain and a comic relief, a combination that could work well only in comedies and which has no place in this movie. Duels are probably the weakest point of the film, as the swordsmen who have had centuries to perfect their skill seem like five-year-olds fighting with sticks. As far as the effects are concerned, I am aware that they could not have been much better in 1986, but they are largely unnecessary and without them the film would be much more convincing. Not everything has to be explicitly shown to the viewer, and a good director would find a way to replace more difficult effects with the imagination of the viewer. Objectively, the only real quality here is Queen's music that stretches through the entire movie. Subjectively - I do not like Queen. The main reason why I did not give a lower rating is a few really hilarious scenes that I was fairly laughing about, primarily a duel for insulting honor where drunk Highlander persistently refuses to die, as well as Kurgan's crazy driving and making faces behind the wheel. I also have to mention the scene of death of Highlander's first wife that, although less and less with every watching because it's poorly done, still shakes me every time and even induce a tear.
6/10
Déjà-vu medley
Last night I saw half of the first season of the new "Sabrina" and, frankly, I do not like it. I did not read the comic book, so I do not know the extent to which the original material is respected, but if you were expecting a remake of the '90s series, you'll be disappointed, because this has nothing to do with it except for a few names. The '90s series was a sitcom, a typical high school comedy with a witch in the main role and a talking cat, whose remarks were by far the best thing on the show. "Chilling Adventures of Sabrina" is a dark fantasy-drama that deals with racism, feminism, religion and coming-of-age topics in, in my opinion, an insipid way. Personally, I prefer dealing with these topics through sarcasm and quality humor, but I have nothing against serious approach either. The trouble is that the new "Sabrina" is not witty. It pretends to a serious approach to these topics, but packed into pretty frivolous fantasy series, which simply doesn't work. The series is not serious enough to experience it as a drama, it's not dark or scary enough for horror, and it's not enough over-the-top to fall under so-bad-it's good type of show. As I watched the first five episodes, all the time I had a déjà-vu feeling, and too often I recognized situations, cadres, details, and even entire scenes from various movies and series. The question arises whether the authors are so unimaginative that they had to copy what is already seen, or their intention was to make the series a homage to the classics they value. Whatever it is, I think they overdid it. Further, I did not like the fact that witches are shown as Satanists and cannibals. I have always looked upon witches as beings in harmony with nature, who have a free choice of whether to use magic for good or for evil, whereas here they are shown as a cult that gets its powers directly from the Devil in exchange for an unconditional surrender to satanism. But most of all I was disappointed by the cat, Salem. His character being terribly neglected is explained by the fact that the main actress is allergic to cats, but there's no excuse for him not being able to speak. On the technical side, the series is well done, and the only thing I resent is a really irritating blurring of the background, the purpose of which I really do not understand.
By both the story and production, "Chilling Adventures of Sabrina" reminds me of the over-the-top tongue-in-cheek series "Scream Queens" and "Ash vs Evil Dead", but it's not nearly as good. Try to imagine any of these two shows trying to be serious and you'll understand why I do not like the new "Sabrina".
6,5/10
Let's start with a quote that perfectly sums up the coherence of the plot: "Ok, let me just see if I can get this straight. You were mortal there, but you're immortal here until you kill all the guys from there who have come here and then you're mortal here. Unless you go back there or some more guys from there come here, in which case you become immortal here again."
When this film came out, it was awesome to me. I was eleven back then and it bought me with a dark atmosphere, strong cast, very good effects for its time, fast pace, entertaining action, and sexy Virginia Madsen. Now, I still liked all of that, and in addition, I enjoyed several examples of great camera and directing, as well as the very good soundtrack, but this time all of that was not enough to cover for one of the worst screenplays in the history of cinema.
"Highlander II: The Quickening" retains the actors and characters from the first film, while completely ignoring the original story. Not only that it is neither sequel nor a prequel, but the stories of these two films are mutually so contradictory that it is impossible to fit them in any way. Even if we completely ignore the previous film, this one is for itself full of holes and illogicality, and it is incredibly stupid. When it comes to story, in this movie every spot is a weak spot. Immortal's mythology doesn't work, quasi-science also doesn't work, and even romance, which is completely redundant, also doesn't work. I mean, they meet for the very first time and minutes after initial introduction they are attacked. He hides her into a garbage can, fights the attackers and kills them. Then she leaves the container and has sex with him against the wall in the middle of the street. Yea, right, very believable. How much this scenario stinks is best illustrated by Michael Ironside statement:
"Yeah, listen, I hated that script. We all did. Me, Sean, Chris... we all were in it for the money on this one. I mean, it read as if it had been written by a thirteen-year-old boy. But I'd never played a barbarian swordsman before, and this was my first big evil mastermind type. I figured if I was going to do this stupid movie, I might as well have fun, and go as far over the top as I possibly could. All that eye-rolling and foaming at the mouth was me deciding that if I was going to be in a piece of s**t, like that movie, I was going to be the most memorable f**king thing in it. And I think I succeeded."
For the nine days of work, Sean Connery received three and a half million dollars and donated the whole amount to charity. I suppose he was just trying to wash away the shame. However, apart from the story, everything else in this movie I liked pretty much, so I can not completely bury it with the rating. Audio-visually I would give it a strong seven, and maybe three for the story.
5/10
Not nearly enough powerful
A deadly virus has "escaped" from the government laboratory and caused an epidemic of apocalyptic proportions. The human race is decimated and rare survivors, who for unknown reasons are immune to the virus, are finding each other and regrouping. In their dreams appear an old woman, who claims to receive instructions from God and calls them to herself, and the mysterious man who directs them on the opposite side. Slowly, people begin to gather in two larger camps, one in the east, the other in the west, and prepare for the final battle between good and evil.
"The Stand" is a six-hour film, directed by Mick Garris, broadcast in the form of a mini-series, if four "episodes" of 90 minutes each can be called a mini-series. The story is quite faithful to the source material, which was expected because Stephen King himself adapted his own novel into the screenplay. It gathers a wealth of familiar faces, including Gary Sinise, Molly Ringwald, Jamey Sheridan, Laura San Giacomo, Miguel Ferrer, Rob Lowe and Stephen King himself. But despite the fact that it was written by King, great cast and a length that leaves more than enough time for elaboration, the story impressed me as two-dimensional and shallow, and characterization is rather unconvincing. Still, the film is distinctly King-ish and very atmospheric, largely contributed by discrete but excellent music, mostly blues. I enjoyed it, but not enough to ever spend six hours on this adventure again. Recommendation for fans of Stephen King and B production of the eighties. The rest of you should better skip it.
6,5/10
PG-13 | 129 min | Action, Adventure, Fantasy
Carina: "I'm not looking for trouble."
Jack: "What a horrible way to live."
The fifth film of the "Pirates of the Caribbean" franchise is in every way "the same" as its predecessors. With minor exceptions, where it fails or shines for a moment, the whole franchise leaves an impression of one big movie. In terms of the story and in terms of directing, editing, camera, effects, sound, and acting, all five movies are more or less at the same level, therefore I have nothing to say about this movie that I have not said before about previous four. I just want to mention the end, which simply screams "Disney" and "Hollywood". Very emotional happy-end, with no humor and without any cliffhanger or at least an indication of the temporality of happiness, somehow does not fit into the tone of this franchise, but although it is typically Hollywood pathetic, or as Captain Jack Sparrow said: "What a truly revolting sight", I admit that it has achieved its purpose and I ended up with a few tears in my eyes.
8/10
"You told me size don't make a difference"
After "Time Bandits" (1981) and "Brazil" (1985), "The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" represents the final movie in Gilliam's "Trilogy of Imagination". These films show the impact of imagination on three periods of human life: "Time Bandits" on childhood, "Brazil" on adulthood, and this one on old age.
Although the film is much better than the "Time Bandits", it does not come close to the brilliant "Brazil". It was nominated for four Academy Awards: for the Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Best Costume Design, Best Visual Effects, and Best Makeup, and, together with the music by Michael Kamen, that's about everything that's good in this movie. For 1988, it is visually fascinating, and still interesting to the fans of the surreal film and Monty Python. While entertaining and somewhat humorous, the film has no particular depth and strength, and gives the impression of a fairy tale intended primarily for children, yet contains scenes and replicas which are by no means appropriate for the youngest audience.
In the leading role is John Neville, primarily a theater actor, who agreed to play in the film just because he is a great fan of Monty Python. The role of Venus is Uma Thurman's first role. She won it on her first audition, which is very rare. Eighteen-year-old Uma is truly divine in the role of the goddess and she completely enchanted me in the scene that imitates Botticelli's painting "The Birth of Venus", as well as during the dance with Baron. Her husband, the god Vulcan, was played by three times older Oliver Reed, who spent most of his time drunk (which is quite obvious in the movie), trying to seduce young Uma. Frankly, the scenes of the fifty-year-old Oliver Reed as Uma's husband, and especially the scene in which Uma kisses with then sixty-three-year-old John Neville, I really did not have to see. There are also Jack Purvis, Jonathan Pryce, Sting, and Robin Williams's head.
Production of this movie was a total mess. There were many problems, the movie was terribly late and twice over budget, so Terry was at the edge of getting fired. The two-dimensional architecture of the Moon was not intended that way. They ran out of money to build a proper set, so Gilliam improvised and made one of the most bizarre and memorable scenes in the film. I will conclude with the quote of Eric Idle, who described this production as a terrible nightmare:
"Up until Munchausen, I'd always been very smart about Terry Gilliam films. You don't ever be in them. Go and see them by all means - but to be in them, fucking madness!"
7,5/10
You can cheat death until it decides to cheat back
Over a hundred years old billionaire covers all costs of experimental cardiological research for having doctors keeping him alive in return... forever? Cleverly using wealth and regulations, he manages to put himself in front of all, and even blackmails doctors to neglect other patients if needed. I suppose the episode aimed to condemn the selfishness and cowardice, but it did not cause this effect in me, and I think it has perfectly demonstrated the relativity of ethics and morality. William Hickey is excellent in the role of an old man who refuses to die, the effects are quite satisfactory, and the episode has a great atmosphere. After five episodes, I can say that this is the best series of this type I've seen so far.
7/10
Speechless...
I watched this two-hour movie without pause, as hypnotized, and when it ended I was left staring at the ending credits and then the black screen for a few more minutes. I had no idea what to write, so I went to see what others have commented. Rare are films that divide the audience like this. There are no middle grades, I didn't see any fives, sixes or sevens. All the reviews I saw either spit on it, rating it one or two, or praise it and give it nines and tens. I think it is both an exaggeration, but one thing is certain - the film achieved the goal that is shared by all the movies, and that is to make a strong impression.
In the dystopian future, it is not allowed to be single. Singles are arrested and taken into a remote hotel, where they have 45 days to pair up or otherwise they'll be transformed into an animal of their own choice. A lot of them escape to the nearby forest and the hotel residents hunt them and for every one caught hunter gets an extra day at the hotel. The film shows both sides of the coin, life in the hotel and life in the forest. It is totally weird, irrational, morbid and mesmerizingly disturbing, yet again, it's not tiring to watch. The cast is very good and Yorgos Lanthimos definitely hooked me to see the rest of his movies.
8/10
In case you didn't notice, except for the main character and his two "best friends", there are no names mentioned in the entire movie. Even the names of the two leading female characters are left unknown.